Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The Future Of Aviation Photography  
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Posted (7 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5942 times:

Hy all,
the title of the thread explain it all : seen the quiet simple and affordable availability of new DSLRs and the increasing number of spotters all around the world, hence the much more difficult challenge to take great, impressive shots,where do you see the world of aviation photography going in the near future ?
My opinion is that it will still remain an affordable hobby for all people, but only a few, and always less, will be the ones that will create really great shots. Probably only people who gain access to restricted areas (such as cockpits for example) will be the ones who lead the edge between an amateuer aviation photographer and a "real" one.
What are you opinions about this issue ?

Ciao


Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5936 times:

I think the biggest problem for photographers over the coming years will be the gradual erosion of places to shoot from and deteriorating tolerance towards the hobby, even in western Europe, where it isn't generally a problem at the moment. Even in the relatively short time since I have been into the hobby, I have seen some good spots vanish at the airports I visit due to their expansion (and failure to accommodate enthusiasts), or heightened security post 9/11.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule and I'm lucky to live near some airports that go out of their way to make enthusiasts welcome, but the general trend would not seem to be so positive.

Regards,

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlineIrish251 From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 959 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 days ago) and read 5795 times:

The ability to take great (or good) shots does not change - it has become easier with the advent of affordable and high-quality DSLR equipment but the eye and skill of the photographer is still what makes the difference between an average and an outstanding photo.

The main change since I began the hobby 25 or so years ago is that many people seem to be taking photos less for their own satisfaction and to preserve their own memories and more to achieve uploads and hits on this or other websites. This website started out as a place where genuinely interesting photos of aircraft from around the world - old and new - could be viewed. While it still performs this function, much of the novelty has worn off and I find myself more interested in the older "gems" than the technically slick current photos. Many of the best photos here have been taken by amateurs who, while taking photos primarily for their own enjoyment, also managed to record commercial and military aviation over the years and whose photos now serve as a rich archive for people around the world to view. I hope that this will remain one of the features of our hobby - website hits are not the only measure by which the value and potential for enjoyment should be measured.


User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5776 times:

I agree entirely Irish251. Don't get me wrong, I love posting shots on this site, and meeting the current criteria is a real challenge sometimes, but ultimately it is actually going to the airport with my camera that I enjoy. Editing can be a real pain (partially because I'm not that great). I have hundreds (possibly thousands) of shots that I could upload, but I prefer to choose the ones that people might find of interest, one way or another.

Regards,

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1971 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5728 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just a thought I wanted to share, but hadn't had a suitable topic, and didn't want to start one, either...

While at Avalon airshow, being a lucky holder of a Media pass, I spent quite a bit of time in the little enclosure at the front of the viewing area reserved for the media and occupied mostly by professional photographers. I watched them work, and mostly it looked like that: as soon as anything went up, the huge lenses were pointed in the sky, and the shooting was done in the continuous drive mode, and the speed of some of those cameras was absolutely staggering. If it was flak, the planes would stand no chance. It didn't even look like photography, more like shooting cinema to me. Then they were showing lucky shots to each other, and there would be quite a few, because if you are proficient enough with the camera that can shoot at, say, 10 fps, and there are these aircraft in the sky doing all those fantastic things, and you have virtually unlimited memory storage, you just shoot away, and you are simply bound to get some good ones.

I'm not aiming this post at the lucky owners of such equipment. It's life - everything moves on, and there is no way we'll ever go back to the good old times, when cameras were slow, film supply limited, and when it took a bit of work to set up every shot.

My point is: is it even art any more, or is it getting downgraded to just some sort of a trade?

It is not an attack aimed at anyone; if I had this sort of equipment I'd be using it, too. I'm just interested to hear other people opinions.

As for great shots, I believe, there will actually be more of them, but it will be harder to find them among the ocean of mediocre pictures. There will be more good photographers, too, but for them, it will be more difficult to get noticed - supply will be much greater than demand...


User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2035 posts, RR: 33
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5702 times:

Quoting Irish251 (Reply 2):
While it still performs this function, much of the novelty has worn off and I find myself more interested in the older "gems" than the technically slick current photos.

This is something I find interesting. There's some good older shots in the database that wouldn't warrant inclusion if they were taken today, typically on motive grounds. I'm referring to shots with ramp lice or maintenance equipment. A great example is the first TWA 747-100 being completed, and the similar Pan-Am shot from the same era; absolute gold.

On the other hand, the great proliferation of cameras now means that no stage of an aircraft's life is going to be missed - the A380 has had an unprecedented pictorial history, which will be matched by the 787 I'm sure.

I don't agree that all people shoot for hits. Ultimately, what you see at Airliners and other sites represents a minute fraction of photographers - for every glamour shot of an Airbus submitted here, there's got to be countless more that others have taken for their own collection.


James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5694 times:

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 4):

My point is: is it even art any more, or is it getting downgraded to just some sort of a trade?

Well Andrei,
with A.net standards and rules concerning motives (altough recently revised) I would NOT say that this kind of photography share something with art. It's more about technology I would say...
Trade ? Yes I'd say yes. The costant search for the top picture requires "up to the standards" equipment. Even though the result is a combination of various things a top equipment surely helps. I own the Canon 100-400 L IS. If I hadn't visited the forum and noticed how many great pictures has been taken with this lens, probably I wouldn't have taken it into consideration for purchase. If you own a website which talks about aviation photography and it turns out that a lens, or a camera, is good, well who has enough money probably will follow these advices. I would say money and trade are involved as an "adverse effect".

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 4):
it will be more difficult to get noticed - supply will be much greater than demand..

I don't even think that demand is high nowdays...One the quetions I wondered is "why you shoot for?". When a purchase thread comes out here in the forum we're talking about 50-100 bucks reward...That's nothing. I mean : here in Italy with that amount you can eat a pizza and go clubbing for a night, but that's all...I wonder how many people live with aviation photography...I guess very very few...

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineOD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1924 posts, RR: 33
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5674 times:

Quoting Sulman (Reply 5):
On the other hand, the great proliferation of cameras now means that no stage of an aircraft's life is going to be missed

A very good point indeed. And it's all documented and free to view for those who would be researching on the subject in the future.

Imagine 20 years later a kid developing interest and finding all in a few clicks. Absolutely amazing!


User currently offlineKukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5647 times:

Quoting LIPH (Thread starter):
My opinion is that it will still remain an affordable hobby for all people, but only a few, and always less, will be the ones that will create really great shots.

I think the opposite will happen. The more photographers there are, the greater the pool from which high-class talents can emerge.

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 4):
as soon as anything went up, the huge lenses were pointed in the sky, and the shooting was done in the continuous drive mode, and the speed of some of those cameras was absolutely staggering. If it was flak, the planes would stand no chance.

I suspect that professional press photographers are simply used to shooting that way. As an amateur, I wouldn't shoot like that because it eats up shutter life so frighteningly fast. I can't afford to replace my gear so I rarely use burst mode these days.

Quoting Sulman (Reply 5):
I don't agree that all people shoot for hits. Ultimately, what you see at Airliners and other sites represents a minute fraction of photographers - for every glamour shot of an Airbus submitted here, there's got to be countless more that others have taken for their own collection.

Very true.



Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5625 times:

Quoting Kukkudrill (Reply 8):
The more photographers there are, the greater the pool from which high-class talents can emerge.

It's a market rule "Kukku"  Wink : the more offer, the less quality, the "cheaper price". Soon there will be no medium level photogs : there will be a few top photogs and a bunch of low rated "side shots" amateur photogs....And most probably the point will be not *what* you shoot with anymore, but rather *WHERE* you will be...

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5606 times:

Quoting LIPH (Reply 9):
And most probably the point will be not *what* you shoot with anymore, but rather *WHERE* you will be...

Sorry to disagree with you Giovanni.....it will always be about *HOW* somebody shoots it. You can't buy skill, talent, a good eye or imagination in a camera store.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5600 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

a bunch of low rated "side shots" amateur photogs

This hobby was built on side on, 50mm slides.

People seem to be clueless that aviation photography as a hobby has been around for 50 years.

Airliners.net has been here 10.

Do the math.


User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5600 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 10):
it will always be about *HOW* somebody shoots it. You can't buy skill, talent, a good eye or imagination in a camera store.

Of course...but skill, talent and imagination are helped by the enviroment you shoot from. It's the enviroment that suggests to me a shot...It'll be hard for me to take a 2 sec exposure shot from the cockpit of the new A380, while landing at Rio, just waiting on the ground...It'll be hard to be the first to shoot a top class seat of the new bought 787 if I don't buy a 6000$ ticket or if I don't get invited to the cerimony...See what I mean ? This probably will make the difference between top rated photogs and the majority of us.
It's nice and fun to stand at the top corner of RWY 04R at Venice airport, but at the end you get bored...you need new challenges, new angles (personally not new "construction numbers" or "registrations"). And not all of them are available for all people...

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineBoeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5577 times:

With the DSLRs getting more and more affordable for amateurs the number of spotters producing
(image-)quality-wise acceptable shots for a.net and other websites will definitely increase as well as the standards of the websites. The more photographers there are the more creativity and diversity will be there so I don't think that the number of great shots will decrease but the number of average quality-wise acceptable shots definitely will increase.
Just my  twocents 

Cheers,
Florian  wave 


User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5540 times:

Quoting LIPH (Reply 12):
It'll be hard for me to take a 2 sec exposure shot from the cockpit of the new A380, while landing at Rio, just waiting on the ground...It'll be hard to be the first to shoot a top class seat of the new bought 787 if I don't buy a 6000$ ticket or if I don't get invited to the cerimony...See what I mean ?

Of course you have a valid point, but - see what I mean  Smile - it's not the future, that's present, and was past too.
There'll always be some with special access, special opportuneties, but in the end it's just about how much you are willing to put into it.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4650 posts, RR: 50
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5540 times:

Quoting LIPH (Reply 9):
Soon there will be no medium level photogs : there will be a few top photogs and a bunch of low rated "side shots" amateur photogs

I don't think this is the case, you will always have the middle class. Technically there is not much holding you back to become middle class so I think it will grow. I like to consider myself middle-class as well. I am not blessed with 'the eye' but I think I take above average photo's.



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5535 times:

And remember that most of the "top" are just inflated egos calling themselves "top" and denigrating others in order to discourage people from improving their skill level.


I wish I were flying
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4650 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5530 times:

Looks like the always positive Jwenting has returned.  Yeah sure

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 16):
And remember that most of the "top" are just inflated egos calling themselves "top" and denigrating others in order to discourage people from improving their skill level.

I do not agree. I am not going to mention specific persons, but I personally know a few photographers from this site who are considered 'top', and they are very friendly people just like you and me. Furthermore I got loads of tips from them, and I see them doing the same here on the forums.

[Edited 2007-04-13 18:19:51]


For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineEK20 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5497 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 14):
it's just about how much you are willing to put into it.

And there we have a winner!  Wink


User currently offlineChrisair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1998 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5400 times:

Quoting Kukkudrill (Reply 8):
I suspect that professional press photographers are simply used to shooting that way. As an amateur, I wouldn't shoot like that because it eats up shutter life so frighteningly fast. I can't afford to replace my gear so I rarely use burst mode these days.

If you are limiting how you shoot because you're afraid of blowing a shutter, stop, relax, and let it rip. You won't blow a shutter simply because you use the 8fps or whatever. Shutters are made to last a very, very long time. Yes, you can hit the useable life of the shutter quicker, BUT, I suspect you wouldn't use it that much. Besides, the shutter is going to go up and down--whether or not it's shot at 8fps or 2fps.

Don't be afraid to shoot. You're not going to hurt the camera.

And, I'd be willing to guess that many press photogs use the motor drive when necessary. Believe me, you don't go into certain stories and blast the shutter.  Smile


User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1971 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5391 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JRadier (Reply 15):
I am not blessed with 'the eye' but I think I take above average photo's.

Yes, that's what makes me blue with envy - not the top equipment, but the proverbial photographer's 'eye'  Smile .

What saves the day for us A.net photographers (most of us, anyway) is the beauty of the subject matter. The airplanes are just too photogenic, they look great even in a below average shot. If it is even slightly above average - they look gorgeous  Smile .

P.S: JRadier, I just had a look at your pictures. You are cutting yourself short - there is nothing wrong with your eye, IMHO  Wink ...


User currently offlineBrianW999 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 312 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5384 times:

To go back to DC10Tim's post (reply 1).

What I cannot understand is the variable attitudes by the airport authorities to aviation photographers at different airports around the UK. I've never been to Manchester but it seems that the airport authorities there bend over backwards to supply facilities for spotters and the generally interested public whereas at Gatwick about the only place you don't get grief is at the 26 threshold on the perimeter road...and if you're driving and want to park up, well, forget it !

Heathrow is not too bad but I hear that there are plans to build a parkland area in the 09L ILS field (Carbon footprint replacement as the reason for doing it). What's the betting that spotters are then banned from the park or extortionate parking charges introduced ? Just think though, wouldn't it be nice if they built a viewing gallery there. I'd be prepared to pay a reasonable fee to park and use the gallery.

Stansted ?.....I don't bother going there. The only place that you won't get grief is on the north side fence behind the trees....with the sun in your face just about all day.

The excuse that you're given by the police at these various places is "Anti terrorism rules".....but just think for a moment. Surely the best deterrent against wrongdoers is to allow people to collect in certain locations. Checking photographers out would be a relatively simple procedure given the amount of personal data available to the police via the Police National Computer and their local intelligence data. Most spotters / photographers know most of their fellows by sight, we know the difference between a 500mm lens and a SAM7 and will be damn quick to call the relevant authority if we see something out of the ordinary or suspicious. That's not just my view either, it's a view held by more than a few police officer acquaintances of mine., and let's face it, when has there ever been ANY evidence of terrorists standing at an airport fence taking photographs. I actually feel rather sorry for the police.They have to apply the orders of their superiors when they would much rather be performing proper police work.

The future ? Not rosy in my opinion. Our nanny state is hell bent on restricting us poor taxpayers to being happy, provided it suits the politicians. You'll soon only be allowed near an airport if you can produce proof that you're actually going to fly somewhere, an activity in itself that is becoming more expensive due to the highway robbery known as "Green Surcharges". ....and that's another subject that I won't get into here.


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1056 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5371 times:

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 4):
Then they were showing lucky shots to each other, and there would be quite a few, because if you are proficient enough with the camera that can shoot at, say, 10 fps, and there are these aircraft in the sky doing all those fantastic things, and you have virtually unlimited memory storage, you just shoot away, and you are simply bound to get some good ones.

G'day Chukcha
Mate i hope this desn't come across to strongly but how do yo figure that standing in the sun,rain and wind for 5 days means that when good shots come along the guys where simply "lucky".
Sorry mate but thats one of the better insults i have heard on the forums continually.
Someone invests thousands of dollars in the best optics and cameras the dollar can buy and then when after standing in a 35kt wind blazing sun and dust like on the Friday and you get a shot even i can be proud of you are told by someone that it was "luck".
The 10FPS gives you the ability to capture images that people with less capable equipment may miss plain and simple.Those great shots you see where a flare is caught just after ejecting from a flare port is luck if its taken with a single shot camera as nobody can anticipate that.However the 9fps camera allows you to get that shot maybe depending on whether you can hold the aircraft in fame while pointing a 4kg lens camera combo at the aeroplane doing 400+Kts while the lens hood is being dragged all over the place by 25kts of wind.
Sorry mate but good gear does take great pics but it makes taking good ones a lot easier.
http://www.jetwashimages.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10010/bigeagle2s.jpg
Dazz

[Edited 2007-04-14 06:33:35]


2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1971 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5359 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 22):
Sorry mate but thats one of the better insults i have heard on the forums continually.

Sorry, mate, wasn't intended.

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 22):
Mate i hope this desn't come across to strongly but how do yo figure that standing in for 5 days means that when good shots come along the guys where simply "lucky".

Well, I guess, it's just comes with job. I don't really feel sorry for you suffering 'in the sun,rain and wind'. I myself spent four days in the same weather running around like a chook with his head cut off collecting material for my articles and taking pictures, too. I don't know how many times a day I covered the distance from one end of the show to the other, but by the end of the day my socks were soaked with blood. I got sunburned, dehydrated, and in four days never got enough sleep. And you know what? Loved every minute of it. Not because I'm a masochist, but because that's what I enjoy doing more than anything else.

So, let's not start about hardships of your work. There are jobs out there that are a lot harder, trust me. I reckon if you have taken it on you don't complain. I also guess that you are willing to put up with all that not because you are desperate to feed you family, but because you love what you are doing, and you wouldn't change you job for any other one, not in a million years. Am I right or am I wrong ?

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 22):
Someone invests thousands of dollars in the best optics and cameras the dollar can buy and then when after standing in a 35kt wind blazing sun and dust like on the Friday and you get a shot even i can be proud of you are told by someone that it was "luck".

What's wrong with 'luck'? I didn't mean it as an insult. Some element of luck is an inherent part of any reporter's job. As for the pre-digital era photographers, their equipment was not any cheaper, and they also had their share of 'wind blazing sun and dust'. The only difference now is more advanced technology, and if you read my post carefully, I have nothing against using it.

I raised a question in my post about whether this kind of photography is true art? I wanted to see some answers to that question, some opinions. You haven''t answered it, you've just said what I already know.

Cheers,
Andrei.

[Edited 2007-04-14 07:19:27]

User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1648 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5337 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Irish251 (Reply 2):
The main change since I began the hobby 25 or so years ago is that many people seem to be taking photos less for their own satisfaction and to preserve their own memories and more to achieve uploads and hits on this or other websites.

Again, perhaps due to my age, I think that this discussion reached its peak at the above comment by Irish251 (Reply 2) - it sums up my feelings. Even further back than Irish, I was photographing aircraft to record them though they were rarely seen by others apart from a few in camera club competitions. I even won one with a very large home-printed one of this, one that would be almost childs' play to take today. It was considered special in 1977 as it was never easy to make very large prints from 35mm film.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mick Bajcar


I love photography, I love aircraft and I liked to record them. Very few people did with the GA stuff though there were more recording airliners and military. Thank goodness we did !
Irish is right and today the subject, the aircraft, is to some almost irrelevant with the hits being the subtantial reason for the taking of the photo in the first place. I have never understood why a single aircraft seat will get massive hits but it does explain (to me) why people continue to upload them in substantial numbers! There is still a place here for the record shots and I still take them because I still like to record aircraft, aircraft that one day will be gone. The technicalities of digital make it far, far easier to get that spectacular shot but time and again I see people not bothering to lift their cameras at the mundane where the mundane can still make a spectacular shot. We had an excuse for not doing so, the cost, and to my eternal regret, I did not do enough. The only reason today can be that they will not be popular ! I don't do many spectacular ones but I do record them well and there is a place here for both interests.
Without the love of the aircraft people will drift away from the hobby, but others will drift in and pass through. I doubt that many will last the 40+ years that I have !
Mick Bajcar


25 Kukkudrill : It's not the speed that worries me but the accumulation of shutter cycles. I have a 350D, whose shutter is said to be rated for 50,000 cycles. A frie
26 Post contains images INNflight : Don't worry...really. You theoretically have another 4 years up to the 50,000....by then it's VERY likely you already upgraded anyway
27 Post contains images Walter2222 : I am getting very close.... What I am worried about is that with my current ratio of transferring old slides into digital (which is also a very nice
28 JRadier : Thanks for writing my name correctly :P. And for the comment as well. I still think I don't have 'it', but I'm too self critical at times. I have to
29 Post contains images Scooter01 : Takes me back to the mid '70es when I used to go to the CNE Airshows with 2 Kodak Retina Reflex bodies (I had only one 135mm lens) and snapped shots
30 Chrisair : Here's the thing though, your shutter can fail at 5,000 frames, 10,000 frames or 500,000 frames. I had a D1X shutter go out with about 25,000 or so o
31 AirSpare : Great photo, I don't have a DSLR but it's obvious it has advantages. Me too! There are a lot of great shots that we just don't have access to. I have
32 Post contains images Skidmarks : I have countless shots that are not A.net quality - neither are they good enough for most other sites. But they were taken because I wanted to illustr
33 Dendrobatid : This is a perverse attitude and, if you continue your interest in aviation, one you will live to regret in the same way as I have for not taking enou
34 Post contains images Skidmarks : Quite right Mick. And with all tools, a bit of TLC makes them last longer. If you're worried about shutter failure after a lot of frames, use it more
35 AirSpare : BTW, you can still replace a shutter on a Nikon FE2, the last I had replaced was 200 bucks total. Sure, it's old school but with a motor drive, it cou
36 Post contains images Kukkudrill : Why will I regret shooting two or three shots of an approach sequence instead of eight or ten on burst mode? Or passing up on a KM Airbus because I a
37 GAWZU : Not sure I agree with that! As a STN local, I use locations at both ends of the airfield (and on either side of the approach at both, mornings and af
38 Lanpie : I agree with Dendrobatid reply 24, I have been into photography since 1969 and interested in aviation photography during 1976 when someone from the US
39 Post contains images Chukcha : Spot on, Mick! In all my fourteen years in the Soviet Aeroflot, I only took a handful of pictures, because there was a very strict policy about not t
40 United_Fan : I too agree,but the Police don't...I already tried that excuse.Plus,the rules are differant for every airport in the US. What is embraced in MIA,FLL,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
History Of Aviation Photography/Spotting posted Thu Apr 14 2005 04:45:44 by BigPhilNYC
The Phil Derner Aviation Photography Resort! posted Sat May 1 2004 19:32:57 by Bigphilnyc
A Masterpiece Of Aviation Photography... posted Thu May 15 2003 18:08:00 by Ljungdahl
The FAA And Aviation Photography posted Wed Feb 13 2002 06:51:24 by EWRvirgin
Batteries Of The Future To Charge In Seconds? posted Sun Jun 11 2006 21:32:21 by 9VSPO
The Importance Of Photography posted Mon Apr 24 2006 15:05:14 by 53Sqdn
The "Basics" Of Aircraft Photography posted Fri Sep 3 2004 11:13:24 by Planespotterx
The Real Aviation Photography I Am Searching For.. posted Thu Jun 3 2004 04:40:29 by Riley
A Good Source Of PR For Aviation Photography? posted Fri Feb 20 2004 04:30:50 by Mirrodie
Mr. SoAndSo Of SomeCity Aviation Photography..Eh? posted Thu Mar 13 2003 04:02:56 by JBLUA320